Strongly disagree. This is coming from someone who's sought after and leaned on their statistics for nearly a decade. The premium stats are generally helpful, but there is a significant potential for misses based on lack of context. One of these examples was evident in my article about Zach Orr's struggles despite having top-tier run stop amounts in the Pittsburgh example I broke down and for the season. Another prime example was one that I brought up this season. Through the first four weeks, Brandon Carr allowed the lowest passer rating in the entire league among all qualifiers. Was he the best corner in the NFL during that span? Absolutely not. Because there were multiple plays, i.e. the two overthrown long TDs to Cody Core and Martavis Bryant among others, that never counted in the stat sheet. That's because a near interception on a perfectly defended go-route is worth exactly the same as getting lost on a double move, falling down, and watching the WR drop the TD. Now with a large sample size, this does generally somewhat even out as these examples can be less likely than likely. That being said, it's happened before throughout entire seasons. During Connor Barwin's 14.5 sack season, he also had the 6th highest pass rush productivity. All in all, that sounds like an elite season. That's until you take into account the fact that 9 of his sacks came while being either unblocked or on cleanup plays, while 46% of his pressures came in such scenarios. I would again have to mention that this isn't an entirely common thread. The grades themselves on the other hand have their own issues at times. But I would caution against using either of the two as the sole barometer. Ideally, in my personal opinion, it should be a combination of the two including personal tape reviews. That said, if I had to trust one over the other, I don't know that I could confidently trust the stats over the grades.